in 2003, rebeckah brooks, kind f had a gaffe, meaning honesty, and told parliament in a hearing that they actually paid police and also said that bugging, you know, secret transmitting devices, all that, was fine if it was in the public interest. but i think she was confusing the public interest with interested the public is interested in it. >> that's a very interesting distinction you just made. public interest versus public being interested. even in the united states, people are paid off for things for stories. where is the line? where do you draw the line? >> "the national enquirer," "the star" they've been gauged in quote/unquote checkbook journalism for a long time. can i say that television, news operations sometimes do that. >> people do pay for things. sometimes it's not a straight payment, but sometimes it's payments -- >> licensing for video. >> we pay for licensing for video. >> photos. i mean $15,000 for a photograph and then sit down for an interview, that's how, you know, a large news operations get around that. and it's legitimate or not, depending on your opinion. in